shireling wrote:No problem. Debates can be civil, Candy - though we've forgotten how to do that in the States - I know we can agree to disagree in here.
That's what I love about you, Shireling! I mean, even if you totally disagreed with me, that would be fine. It'd make for a very boring world if everyone agreed with each other on everything all the time.
shireling wrote:I agree with you..."Rename the person, change a few details, then do what you like with your fictional character. He is yours and you own him completely." I've done that with my fan fics, building the character around roles that the individual played. For instance, the Prince in "A Harpy's Tale" was inspired by The Guy in "Spy Kids 3: Game Over".
Harmless, hassle-free and I'll have to check it out. Sounds like a great idea for a story!
shireling wrote:You also said "And I don't think being dead ought to make you fair game," and I agree, totally.
I would also add that just because you're a living, public person and you have a profession that exposes you on a routine basis, should not mean that you belong to the public and any self-serving creep with a camera has the right to stalk and snap you anytime, place or where.
Oh, that one. It's really annoying to think that if you become famous, you become public property. I think it's only right to let even the most publicity-seeking celebrities have their privacy when they want it. It's not really in the public interest to make horrible comments about Kirstie Alley's waistline, is it?
shireling wrote:Trying to avoid seeing so-called "celebrity news" is damned hard. The current big name - who is very, very sick and, I think, needs hospitalization - is instead being interviewed in this condition. Can't anybody say "no", anymore? Can't anybody say, this isn't in your best interests and we won't play a part in your destruction? The father of this person is from my home-town, and he's got my sympathy. There's nothing he can do - his son's an adult - or at least he's old enough to pass for one.
Ah, Charlie Sheen. Yeah, he's way off the rails ATM, and there's this rather morbid rubber-necking thing going on in the media about it. I don't like that at all, and no doubt it's making the situation a great deal worse.
shireling wrote:I know I've gone way off topic...sorry.
You haven't, in my opinion. I think you've opened this up to show new angles on the RPF concept. Because, when you think about it, that's exactly what a lot of the "Celebrity gossip" is. Fiction. My personal favourite has Sharon Stone whipping out a revolver and shooting a snake mere inches from the interviewing reporter. She denied the whole story on Parkinson, even though it made her look cool, glamorous and a bit scary -- like the character in the movie she was promoting at the time.
She poo-poohed it because it flat out wasn't true.
And that's the exact issue with the Hillard story. It may be harmless and make the Professor look good, but it's not true.